December 2013 - luv-talk

I want a new netbook!
by Trent W. Buck 31 Dec '13

31 Dec '13

Any suggestions on what netbook to buy? Scroll past the ranting for the functional requirements. \begin{rant} I've had a TF101[0] for a couple of years, and I'm fucking sick of it. Because it's a tegra2 (ARM), I can't upgrade the kernel without doing a ridiculous dance using an x86-only binary reflashing tool from nvidia. And I'm sick of not being able to use an external screen or bluetooth or have accelerated 2D graphics. Even the onboard speakers don't work and the headphones get interference from the backlight unless the brightness is 100% or 0%. And my storage is only an eMMC and an SD card, and I removed the ext journal from the SD card and now whenever I try to read or write to some directories the shitty Asus-supplied Android-flavoured kernel I'm running (with an equally ancient Ubuntu userland) just koopses and reboots. (And dd'ing the fs onto a fresh SD card didn't help.) None of those are show-stoppers[1], but the whole reason I bought an ARM was because BATTERY LIFE! and I want to believe that current-gen x86-64 netbooks can compete with ARM there. If that's so, there's no need to put up with ARM vendors' idea devices are MAGICAL UNIQUE SNOWFLAKES protected from any expectation of interoperability. \end{rant} I had a look at the Asus T100[2] which looks to be their current x86-flavoured equivalent of the TF101, but it ships with a 32-bit EFI, which mjg59 says is VERY VERY STUPID and phoronix says makes life gratuitously hard when using stock x86-64 bootloader/kernel/userland. So my requirements (RFC 2119) go something like this: MUST run Debian jessie without too much hassle. Hardware that Debian can't drive that doesn't count. MUST be around 10" (12" is too big, 7" is too small). MUST be around 1kg. MUST have onboard keyboard & screen. MUST accept an SSD as primary storage. (Either 2.5" SATA or mSATA/PCIe are fine.) (It need not ship with an SSD; I'll buy a good one.) MUST have 802.11. MUST have at least one USB host port. MUST have onboard speakers and/or a 3.5mm speaker jack. SHOULD have at least 12h battery life. On the basis that vendor lies, Windowsisms and wear will reduce this to an 8h battery life after two years, which is about the minimum I want. I'd like this to be a "MUST", but I doubt x86-64 can manage it within the volume/weight constraints. Plan B is "FFS, just buy a second power brick". SHOULD have video out. I'd prefer DisplayPort over HDMI, but I'll take anything that Debian can speak. The intention is for day-to-day use to be with an external keyboard & screen. SHOULD ship with at least 2GB RAM. SHOULD accept at least 4GB RAM. SHOULD have hardware virtualization. SHOULD have a micro SD slot. SHOULD have bluetooth (for keyboard). SHOULD be available off-the-shelf in Melbourne. I like kicking the tyres before I buy stuff. SHOULD be around A$500 to A$750. SHOULD have passive cooling. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asus_Eee_Pad_Transformer [2] http://www.asus.com/Notebooks_Ultrabooks/ASUS_Transformer_Book_T100/ [1] I could even fix some of them -- like not being able to access /boot from the running system -- if I was prepared to piss about building a new rootfs and reflashing it. But I'd rather not do that while it's my only computer.

1 0

Boot drives PCI-e SSD boot drives vs SATA III (SSD and rotating)
by Rohan McLeod 31 Dec '13

31 Dec '13

Assembled cognoscenti; on the off-chance someone is interested in fast boot-drives; (yes I know; if one doesn't boot down, one doesn't need to boot up ! : - / ; just wondering if anyone has had experience with: PCI-e SSD boot drives vs SATA III(SSD and rotating). There is a comparison of a few of the former here at http://techau.com.au/review-revodrive-240gb-pci-e-ssd-vs-ocz-agility-3-240g… thanks Rohan McLeod

4 6

Re: [luv-talk] ISP alters attachments
by achalmers＠westnet.com.au 23 Dec '13

23 Dec '13

!< Firstly the correct way to quote text is to prepend each line with "> ". Oh for the love of fuck let it go. You are not spending cycles on education here, this is the type of (ultimately bullying) behaviour that has ruined our culture. How noble the heart that must kick a flea. My last words as president of Linux Users of Victoria were - "Be Excellent to Each Other." This is why. Do better, try harder. Further correspondence will not be entered into. ALC

7 6

Refugees (was Re: Vale Nelson Mandela)
by Tim Josling 21 Dec '13

21 Dec '13

There is a lot of talk comparing Australia's practices around the arrival of boat people and such to the Nazi holocaust, saying it is insane, that Asian countries are shocked by our callousness and inhumanity, and so forth. (I am paraphrasing here.) I tried earlier in a gentle way to suggest that such comparisons are not a good idea. Let me try again. Such comparisons are a) Over the top. If someone can really make a case that our immigration policy is reasonably comparable to the deliberate slaughter of millions of people from racial, political, and sexual minorities, I have not seen it. These sort of stretched comparisons just discredit those making them. As a part-Jewish friend put it to me, even a comparison to the repatriation of refugees by England to Stalin's Russia after WWII would be stretched, let alone a comparison to Hitler's extremination campaigns. b) Counter productive. Making such over-dramatized comparisons just makes it easy for people to dismiss your arguments. Why should people take seriously those who make such inaccurate comparisons? c) Dangerous. You run the risk of seriously offending and demeaning those who were impacted by the events of WWII, by implicitly diminishing the scale and horror of their tragedy. Further, if you make such comparisons without proposing an alternative policy, and showing what its realistic implications would be, you also lack credibility. What is the alternate policy? That anyone who shows up and claims to be a refugee can stay? Surveys suggest that 40% of the third world's population would move to a western country if they could. What would be the implications of this? Among other things it would make our current welfare state impossible to sustain. Forget Medicare. Forget aged pensions. Forget unemployment benefits. Saying we should be more humane to claimed refugees is not a policy proposal. The Greens' 'policy' falls well short and does not analyse the consequences. They are silent on the question of what happens to those not found to be refugees. Some libertarians do say that they support the right of unrestricted immigration. They acknowledge the consequences. I do respect this to some extent. But when I see these statements without any actual concrete policy proposal, and without acknowledging the consequences of such a policy, one might begin to suspect that what we are seeing is not much more than moral posturing.

7 10

ISP alters attachments
by Keith Bainbridge 21 Dec '13

21 Dec '13

G'day All I was told today by our tech people that many ISPs alter files that are attached to email, as an explanation why I was having trouble opening some .doc files in MSWord. Any comment? please Thanks Keith keithrbaugroups(a)gmail.com 0447 667 468

7 9

Re: [luv-talk] Protecting Reproductive Choices from Religious Doctrine
by Petros 17 Dec '13

17 Dec '13

Quoting "Lev Lafayette" <lev(a)levlafayette.com> > In 2008 the Abortion Law Reform Act decrimalised abortion up to 24 > weeks > .. > Rogue Frankston MP, Geoff Shaw, has flagged his intention to introduce a > private members bill that will remove that assurance of medical service. Well, that's where the tail wags the dog. But, actually, Naphtine and Co love it - because it destructs from their real issues. I hope it does not get too much attention. Then it will die quietly. I actually hope that the whole government dies a sudden death (not literally). They are hell-bent destroying the environment I live and work in, without being elected to do so, for the benefit of their mates from high end of town (a project called East West Link). A multi billion dollar rort. An example were "non core promises" were made: "We support Metro Rail" was on their election agenda. My quote of the week comes from Abbott: ''The lesson that I have well and truly learnt from that is that we do have to precisely honour our commitments - and that's the spirit of the commitments, not just the letter of the commitments" Regards Peter

1 0

Protecting Reproductive Choices from Religious Doctrine
by Lev Lafayette 17 Dec '13

17 Dec '13

After Bianca's talk on Saturday, some LUVers may wish to attend this gathering, organised by yours truly.... Protecting Reproductive Choices from Religious Doctrine A Meeting of the Victorian Secular Lobby, Inc. Abortion in Victoria used to be a criminal offense except under limited cases. In 2008 the Abortion Law Reform Act decrimalised abortion up to 24 weeks, with allowance after that if necessary. This legislation had widespread community and bipartisan support and passed the Legislative Assembly 49-32 after a conscience vote, and the Legislative Council 23-17. Part of that legislation requires publically licensed medical practitioners, as part of their profession, to refer patients to to other medical practitioners if they have a conscientious objection to abortion. It also compels medical staff to perform an abortion to save the life of a woman. Rogue Frankston MP, Geoff Shaw, has flagged his intention to introduce a private members bill that will remove that assurance of medical service. Shaw is a member of the Liberal Party, but holds the balance of power as an independent, following allegations that he had used parliamentary resources for his private business interests. In a surprise move the Victoria's Office of Public Prosecutions dropped criminal charges for these activities, which ensures that current state government retains power. An evangelical Christian, Shaw has made no secret of his opposition to women being able to make their own reproductive choices and is prepared to coerce his private religious belief to secular law. In addition, Victoria's Liberal Party state conference this month voted to remove section 8 of the Act in order to 'restore freedom of conscience of doctors'. The Victorian government runs the risk of having major policies determined by a religious fundamentalist in their quest to retain power; and the guaranteed reproductive rights of women are the cost of that power. This meeting of the Victorian Secular Lobby will discuss strategies to ensure that the reproductive rights of women are not overturned in this parliament and that the public responsibilities of medical professionals are retained. Saturday, December 21st, 18:00 (6pm): 110 Grey Street, East Melbourne (Unitarian Church conference room) Guest Speaker: Colleen Hartland, Greens MLC for Western Metropolitan Region -- Lev Lafayette, BA (Hons), GradCertTerAdEd (Murdoch), GradCertPM, MBA (Tech Mngmnt) (Chifley) mobile: 0432 255 208 RFC 1855 Netiquette Guidelines http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt

1 0

Re: [luv-talk] Refugees (was Re: Vale Nelson Mandela)
by Petros 17 Dec '13

17 Dec '13

Quoting "Tim Josling" <tim.josling(a)gmail.com> > It long puzzled me why people would take positions that involve a) > Not actually articulating a policy I wrote a few mails back about refugees organising their own camps and using refugees for regional development in Australia, boosting local economies where needed. It is supported by the formerly mentioned Melissa Parke, Member of Parliament for the seat of Fremantle. You will hear similar ideas from the member for Melbourne, Adam Bandt. That they are Labor and Green party members does not matter - it matters what they stand for. Liberal had people with conscience in their ranks before. Haven't heard much of it lately though. Making people plainly disappear in other third world countries without taking responsibility, without being accountable for them and without giving them a future is not a policy. It is plainly inhumane. Regards Peter

5 4

Re: [luv-talk] IPSec "road warrior" configuration for a Windows 7 (andXP) client
by Petros 17 Dec '13

17 Dec '13

Quoting "Slav Pidgorny (GEUS)" <slav.pidgorny(a)anz.com> > (From Peter) >> I am struggling to get IPSec access from a Windows 7 client. > > There are few possibilities: 1) the certificate is missing from the > computer store; That was it. I had to import the key and certificate as a PKCS12 package and import as described here: http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/IPsec_L2TP_VPN_server#Windows:_Correctly_instal… Well, I have a new error ("no suitable proposal found") .. will see. Yesterday I was right at the edge of a cliff. Today I made a big step forward;-) More steps to follow.. Thanks Peter

1 0

IPSec "road warrior" configuration for a Windows 7 (and XP) client
by Petros 17 Dec '13

17 Dec '13

Hi, I am struggling to get IPSec access from a Windows 7 client. On the server, I have - a self-generated CA cerificate cacert.pem and a private key cakey.pem - a signed certificate warrior1-cert.pem and a private key warrior1-key.pem I managed to import the cacert.pem as a new trusted root CA in Windows 7 using mmc and this: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc754841.aspx I just don't know where to put the warrior1-cert.pem. When I connect a VPN configured with http://kb.iweb.com/entries/22375983-Configuring-new-VPN-L2TP-IPSec-connecti… it tells me: "Error 766: A certificate could not be found. Connections that use the L2TP protocol over IPSec require the installation of a machine certificate, also known as a computer certificate." I fiddled around a bit with the mmc, putting the warrior1-cert.pem into the "Private" collection of the machine, or let it choose the store "automatically" but I haven't had success. What are the missing parts? If I have done it, I have to do the same on XP..:-( If someone has it working please let me know how. Thank you Peter

2 1